The image and caption highlight the cyclical nature of public attentiveness to the toxic issue of algal blooms here in a very interesting way. The presence of the worker highlights the labour that goes into managing toxic sites.
This image is beautiful. I was curious to hear more about what exactly the figure pictured here is doing with the rake and the algae—presumably attempting to remove the algae? Is this a common practice? Does it help alleviate the toxification of the river at all, or is it more an aesthetic effort? And what does it mean for there to be “religious stretches” of the river?
This image reflects the ethnographer's gaze, from above and behind, upon what is presumably a quotidian activity (one assumes that algae is being raked out of the river). It is interesting that the shadow of the ethnographer is literally present here, in the upper left corner of the image. Pollution in the form of discarded trash is visible in the frame, the most obvious reminder of the toxicity of the place. Equally indicative, however--as the caption makes clear--is the algae itself, which is thriving on untreated wastewater flowing into the river. The image raises questions about the various ways in which toxicity is made visible, and the instrumental role of the ethnographer herself in the process.
The visualisation communicates the temporary visibility of toxicity in the river through algal blooms, as well as the immediate yet incomplete solution: manual removal. The picture illustrates how an immediate 'solution' might in fact perpetuate the underlying problem.